MR T wrote:
Sussex wrote:
Isn't that what the unions should be fighting for?
ONLY PROBLEM IS THAT THE LIVERPOOL COURTS DID NOT DO THAT........THEY SOLD THEM FOR 200,000 POUNDS mrT.....
You never cease to amaze me. You must have read the Wirral Judgement more times than soft Mick, yet you still don't understand it. What don't you understand about artificial values?
As was clearly stated by Bellamy when referring to the judgement in Hempenstall v Minister of the Environment.
Property rights arising in licences created by law (enacted or delegated) are subject to the conditions created by law and to an implied condition that the law may change those conditions.
In other words, "the artificial private value" that licenses attain because of legislation or authoritative decisions can just as easily be removed by the same process.
To some of us it seems you still have your head buried in the sand. Bellamy very eloquently pointed out that a Hackney carriage license is not a possession under ECHR and that it only has a value in restricted authorities because a council has a policy of restricting them.
It might help you get over it if you repeat after me,
"My licence has a scarcity value and nothing more" "my licence has a scarcity value and nothing more" "my licence has a scarcity value and nothing more" "my licence has a scarcity value and nothing more" "my licence has a scarcity value and nothing more" "my licence has a scarcity value and nothing more".
Repeat that long enough and it just might sink in how vulnerable you are.
In respect of a Judge ordering the selling of a plate as a business Asset I would just like to say, it is hard to comment on a case that I or anybody else including you, knows very little about. I'm surprised your local rag Taxitalk didn't write an article about it, or did they?
JD